ATCT LCL CTLR; ALSO WORKING GND CTL; CLRS ACFT TO CROSS RWY WITH A SF340 ON SHORT FINAL.

Date: 2001-06 · Aircraft: SF 340A

Anomalies: atc-issue-all-types|conflict-ground-conflict|less-severe|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|ground-incursion-runway

Synopsis

ATCT LCL CTLR; ALSO WORKING GND CTL; CLRS ACFT TO CROSS RWY WITH A SF340 ON SHORT FINAL.

Narrative

TWR CLRED US TO LAND ON RWY 4L AT JFK. AT APPROX 3 MI; TWR CLRED AN ACFT TO CROSS RWY 4L. THIS WAS NO FACTOR. INSIDE 2 MI; TWR CLRED ANOTHER ACFT; B767; TO CROSS RWY 4L AT TXWY F. IT WAS CLR THAT THE CROSSING ACFT WOULD NOT CLR THE RWY PRIOR TO US LNDG. WE INITIATED A GAR AT APPROX 150-100 FT AGL; MOST LIKELY PRIOR RWY THRESHOLD; AND RETUNED TO LAND ON RWY 4R. WAS TOO BUSY TO NOTICE ACTUAL SEPARATION; BUT IT WAS A ROUTINE GAR; NOT AN EVASIVE OR EMER TYPE MANEUVER. UPON CALLING TWR TO ADVISE WE WERE GOING AROUND; THEY APOLOGIZED. THE PROBABLE CAUSE OF THIS EVENT WAS THE TWR CTLR FORGETTING HE CLRED US TO LAND ON RWY 4L; MOST LIKELY DUE TO BEING OVERLOADED CTLING AIRBORNE TFC AND TFC ON THE GND. PERHAPS USING A SEPARATE GND FREQ CTLR FOR ACFT WHICH HAVE LANDED AND TAXIED CLR OF THEIR RWY; AND NEED TO CROSS ANOTHER ACTIVE RWY; OR A SEPARATE FREQ (CTLR) FOR LANDING AND DEP RWYS WHEN JFK IS USING THE RWY 4'S. THE CTLRS AT JFK ARE EXCELLENT. I BELIEVE THERE WAS JUST TOO MUCH TFC AT THE TIME AND THE WORKLOAD SHOULD HAVE BEEN SPLIT.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.